Research › Search › Judgment

Delhi High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1187 (DEL)

Chhavi v. Union Of India

2022-05-18

SACHIN DATTA, VIPIN SANGHI

body2022
ORDER 1. The present appeal is directed against the order dated 06.05.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 7067/ 2022. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the said writ petition preferred by the petitioners by placing reliance upon the earlier decision dated 04.05.2022 in W.P.(C) 6834/2022, titled Saloni Yadav & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. 2. The challenge in the writ petition raised by the petitioners/ appellants was to the introduction of the condition that the candidates desirous of pursuing B.Sc. (Nursing) course should clear the NEET UG-2022 Examination to be eligible for admission in the said course for the academic session 2022-23. 3. The submission of the appellants was that the course on which the NEET UG-2022 Examination was premised was different from the course on which the competitive examination for B.Sc. (Nursing) has been held over the years. The submission was that for the NEET UG Examination, the weightage is not given as much to English language and General Intelligence, as it is to Science subjects. The appellants claimed that the appellants had been preparing for a year for the B.Sc. (Nursing) Examination on the basis of the syllabus prescribed in the said course, and suddenly was visited with the advertisement issued by the respondents laying the condition that the candidate had to clear the NEET UG Examination, 2022. The advertisement was issued on 26.04.2022 laying down the aforesaid condition. 4. The learned Single Judge, has followed her own earlier decision in Saloni Yadav (supra) dated 04.05.2022. In that case, the petitioner had assailed the same stipulation in relation to the MNS for the same academic session 2022-23 on similar grounds. The writ petition preferred by Saloni Yadav was dismissed after noticing that the candidates had been given sufficient notice to prepare for the NEET UG Examination, since the same has been fixed for 17.07.2022, whereas, the stipulation laid down for appearance and clearance of NEET UG Examination was laid down in advertisement dated 26.04.2022. The learned Single Judge also noticed that the overall merit for the said examination was to be drawn not only on the basis of NEET UG Examination but also on the basis of the combined performance of the candidates in the NEET examination, the CBT and the interview subject to medical fitness. The discussion found in the judgment in Saloni Yadav (supra) reads as follows: '7. The discussion found in the judgment in Saloni Yadav (supra) reads as follows: '7. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, I am of the view that at the first blush, the grievance of the petitioners appears to be merited as the respondents have admittedly changed the pattern for selection of candidates for admission to B.Sc. (Nursing) only on 22.04.2022. However, what emerges is that on account of the extension granted by the NTA to apply for the NEET-UG exam and taking into account the fact that the NEET-UG exam is scheduled to be held on 17.07.2022, the petitioners and all other candidates will still get more than two months' time to prepare and appear in the NEET-UG, 2022. In these circumstances, the petitioners' plea that they will not have sufficient time to apply and prepare for NEETUG is without any merit and therefore no prejudice will be caused to the interested students to prepare for the NEET-UG exam, which is now a mandatory condition for seeking admission to B.Sc (Nursing) course. 8. In so far as the petitioners' grievance that the syllabus for the entrance test has been radically changed, I am of the considered view that once the experts in the field have taken a considered decision regarding the eligibility conditions and the subjects on which the prospective candidates for admission to the B. Sc (Nursing) course should be tested, this Court ought not to interfere with the same unless it is found to be totally perverse or arbitrary. Moreover, since it is an admitted position that most of the universities including the Delhi University and those in the state of Maharashtra, with which the nursing institutes run by the respondents are affiliated, have already issued guidelines directing that the admissions to B.Sc (Nursing) should be based only on NEET-UG examination, the respondents were fully justified in prescribing the same eligibility criteria as prescribed for the NEET-UG, for admission to the B.Sc (Nursing) in their institutes as well. It is not the petitioners' case that the syllabus for NEETUG exam, 2022 is different from syllabus of Class XII and therefore, merely because the students will now be tested in more detail in the science subjects cannot be a reason to interfere with the well-considered decision of the experts. 9. It is not the petitioners' case that the syllabus for NEETUG exam, 2022 is different from syllabus of Class XII and therefore, merely because the students will now be tested in more detail in the science subjects cannot be a reason to interfere with the well-considered decision of the experts. 9. The petitioners' plea that since they have been preparing General English and General Intelligence for the last many months as per the earlier syllabus for the entrance examination, the respondents ought to follow the earlier pattern for this year as well, is also without any merit. It has been categorically stated by the respondents that the final selection for admission to B.Sc (Nursing) will be based not only on the results of the NEET-UG 2022 but on the combined merit of performance of a candidate in NEET UG, the CBT and interview subject to the medical fitness and therefore, it is not as if the preparation in General English and General Intelligence, which the petitioners claim to have been made for the entrance exam will go waste. 10. I therefore find no infirmity in the decision of the respondents to include a mandatory eligibility condition of qualifying the NEETUG as per the criteria fixed by the NTA, as a pre-condition for admission to the B.Sc (nursing) in their institutes. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed without no orders as to costs.' 5. The submission of learned counsel for the appellants is that there is a difference in the courses that the appellants are desirous of pursuing which is B.Sc. (Nursing), and not the MNS. The appellants have sought to bring out those differences in the present appeal. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent, who appears on advance notice points out that the subjects on which the candidates are tested for the NEET UG Examination is the same as the subjects on which the candidates were earlier been tested for the B.Sc. (Nursing) Course. 7. We have heard learned counsel for the appellants, and perused the impugned judgment, including the judgment in Saloni Yadav (supra) and we find no merit in the present petition. In our view, the case of the appellants are no different from the case of Saloni Yadav and merely because the appellants are desirous of competing for B.Sc. (Nursing) as opposed to the MNS which was dealt with in Saloni Yadav (supra), it makes no difference. In our view, the case of the appellants are no different from the case of Saloni Yadav and merely because the appellants are desirous of competing for B.Sc. (Nursing) as opposed to the MNS which was dealt with in Saloni Yadav (supra), it makes no difference. The distinctions sought to be drawn by the appellants in paragraph 6 of the appeal are wholly irrelevant. The appellants have been given sufficient notice to prepare for the NEET UG Examination which is slated to be held on 17.07.2022. Admittedly, the advertisement for the B.Sc. (Nursing) Course was issued on 26.04.2022. The appellants are similarly situated as other candidates who would be appearing for the examination in question. 8. For the aforesaid reasons, we find no merit in this appeal and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.